Alcohol Screening & Brief Interventions in a Policing Context.
A Feasibility Study
Nicola Brown
Dorothy Newbury-Birch
Eileen Kaner
Background 23% of the adult population, or 7.1 million people, in
England drink alcohol in a hazardous or harmful way
60-65% prevalence in CJS settings
Total cost of alcohol-related crime in England & Wales is £7.3 billion
Alcohol and Crime 40% of Binge Drinkers admitted
committing a crime in past 12 months (Budd 2003)
Binge drinkers 5 times more likely to be involved in a fight in previous 12 months (Richardson and Budd 2003)
Victim, offender or both had been drinking in previous 4 hours in 90% of assaults (Finney 2004)
Alcohol is consumed before 73% of domestic violence cases (Gilchrist 2003)
Up to 25% of current Police work is associated with alcohol related incidents (Palk 2007)
Aim To explore the feasibility of providing alcohol SBI in the Police
setting
To survey the number of detainees that can be screened for alcohol use within a given time frame in a Police station
To determine the number & proportion of hazardous/ harmful drinkers that are willing to engage in BA
To establish the training needs of Detention Officers for conducting alcohol SBI
Design
£10K funding £5K South Tyneside DAAT £5K South Tyneside PCT
3 months data collection May to July 2009
Process
South Shields Police Station Carried out by 10 detention officers During finger printing just prior to release Inclusion criteria
Arrested for a public order offence or any assault offence (excluding attempted murder or murder)
Aged 18 or over Alert and orientated Able to speak, read and write English sufficiently well
to comprehend the intervention
Data Collection
Participants characteristicsAge, gender, occupation, ethnicity
Arrest DetailsReason for arrest, time, day
Audit Score - 10 questions BA delivery & explanation if not
Findings
229 participants involved
From a possible 634 target arrests (36%) 80% Male 92% White British 52% Unemployed 63% data collected on weekends
Age and screening outcome of the 229 participants
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Under 20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61+ Missing
No
. o
f p
art
icip
an
ts
Positive Negative Missing
Arrest Classifications
Expanded as some DO’s included
people outside of the remit Assault – 50% Public Order – 40% Other – Drug possession, sexual offences,
child neglect, arson etc – 10%
Screening Outcome for all 229 participants
Refused or unable to take part23%
Positive58%
Negative19%
For the 172 participants who completed a questionnaire 132 (75%) had an AUD
Breakdown of Positive Screening Outcome (AUDs)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Increased Risk / Hazardous Level High Risk/ Harmful Level Possible Dependancy
No
. of
pa
rtic
pa
nts
50% 14% 36%
AUDIT Question 3. How often do you have 6 or more standard drinks on one occasion?
Never11%
Less than monthly13%
Monthly22%Weekly
33%
Daily/ Almost daily19%
Missing2%
AUDIT Question 9. Have you or somebody else been injured as a result of your drinking?
No – 86 (49%)
Yes, but not in the last 6 months – 15 (9%)
Yes during the last 6 months – 71 (40%)
Missing – 4 (2%)
Further analysis
Possibilities to analyse each AUDIT questions and cross-match for certain demographic characteristics
Qualitative interviews with the
Detention Officers involved
Limitations
One North East Police Station
3 month data collection
Representative sample
Future Work
Total arrest for 3 months was >2000 Exploring the DO views may give an
insight into; acceptability & feasibility possible new ways of working future research possibilities
Conclusions
229 of 634 (36%) of all target arrests were screened for alcohol consumption
176 of 634 (28%) completed the AUDIT
126 of the 133 (95%) who screened positive were willing to engage in BA
Thank you
Any questions?